SupervisionT&L Conference 2007

Kate Williamson

School of Education

Today’s session background

Proposed research project

Student dimension

Staff dimension

CLT group UG / PG

I want to cover:

Background thoughts

Data from student questionnaire

Reflections on how we supervise

Moving forward

Just general supervision: not

Special educational needs

Gender issues

Intercultural issues

UG research projects

Often seen as the last but most challenging obstacle

Should be about their first big project

Which lays foundations for a developmental pathway

And makes them part of an academic research community

Transparency

Anti-litigation strategies

A shared journey

Sharing the risk

Supervision is..

Guiding?

Framing?

Teaching?

Sharing?

Facilitating?

Models of supervision

‘Technical rationality’

‘Negotiated order’ Actions of students and supervisors based on

perspectives derived from:

Past / present experiences Interactions with others Interpretations of situations (Wisker, 2005: 25-29)

supervision

Is a socially constructed product of mutual expectations between students and supervisors and subject to negotiation and change over time

The interface is a personal relationship, often 1-2-1

The ‘tucked in’ phenomenon

Often no CPD

Lacks focus in terms of the practices of teaching

UG ITE

Research Preparation

Preparation for tutorial time

Mostly number of hours

Suggestions about how to use effectively

Student responsibility

Student questionnaire

Primary 3 – 7

Primary 5 – 11

Upper Primary Lower Secondary

2 Year BA

CPD generic UG

Sample

9 CPD – discarded

165 returned for ITE

100% response

Allocated Tutorial time

Satisfied 34

Wanted more 107

Non response 23

Had none 1

N = 165

Satisfied with their tutorial time

Satisfied Students Tutorial hours

11 3 / 3.5 hours

19 2 / 2.5 hours

4 1 hour

0 30 mins

Total = 34

Wanted more on top of what?

Students Had tutor hours

29 3 / 3.5 hours

32 2 / 2.5 hours

29 1 hour

17 30 mins

Total = 107

Preference for tutorial time allocation

Allocation- hours

As Given Extra hour

Extra 2 hours

Extra 3 hours

Totals

3+ 11 16 10 3 40

2-3 19 20 3 9 51

1 4 13 12 4 33

30 mins 0 6 6 5 17

Totals 34 55 31 21 141

Supervision format

All but 1 had individual time with tutor

The majority had email contact with tutor

19 experienced paired or small group tutorials (some overlap, so less)

Preferences

Overwhelmingly for one to one tutorials

Combined 1-2-1 + email the next most popular

2/19 enjoyed the shared tutorial

Student expectations of tutor

Guidance on subject content Help with structuring your writing Help with generating ideas Supporting writing skills Critiquing your work

Student expectations of tutor

No clear pattern

Predominantly subject guidance

Followed by critique of draft work

Supervisors helpful?

Largely yes: 134 / 164 thought so

Some ‘very helpful’

Calming – reassuring – positive – supportive

laughed – respectful – easy to contact

provide ideas – honest - critical - helpful

What helpful supervisors did

Read work – clarified ideas Reassured checked work – provided feedback answered emails built confidence allowed discussion told student about new research arranged meetings

Unsatisfactory tutors

About 30 were mentioned

Maybe 30 tutors or a smaller number with multiple tutees

Main complaints were access and availability

Illness / absence / change of tutor

Unsatisfactory tutors

Were difficult to meet did not answer emails at all - or did so too

late didn’t seem clear about regulations didn’t provide feedback or no immediate

feedback were harshly critical did not provide encouragement – negative

Supervision tasks

Please think about supervision tasks and fill in the flip charts available

What disrupts supervision?

Preparation of tutors and students

Recognition of the product

Recognition of the process

Indicators along the way

Conceptual development

How do we promote this?

How do we recognise it

How do we help the student to recognise this?

Learning styles

Recognising individual learning styles

Making space for individual learning styles

Identity of ‘research worker’

May not be wanted May not be clear May not be seen as useful/professional May be seen as superfluous May not want to move on!

Make explicit:

Previous experience of supervision

personal anchors

personal identity issues

to excavate fundamental ideas about learning

Recommendations

Mentoring Self evaluation Journal keeping Taping tutorials Interpersonal skills???

Preparation module

Could this focus more effectively on appropriate use of tutors?

Can we more effectively present the supervisory process as a mode of teaching and learning?

Is this as important as learning about research methods?